The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Jelster said:
I have the Lee 100mm set with the wide angle adaptor. Best I can get is about 13mm, it vignettes after that.
Click to expand...

According to Lee this combo should work, how many slots have you in the adapter?

My Hitech 85mm kit went below 13mm on @mickledore 's 10-24

Anyway this is all irrelevant as none of these kits will work on the forthcoming 8-16mm!!!!
 
Last edited:
Hey all - I've not really been posting, in big part because I'm in my near seasonal sell all my kit phase (yes my wife does get to take the p*** each year and I still may well get rid of the XT20 because I have the XT1 too now as well) - this year wasn't helped by really not liking what lightroom does with the files coupled with trying my best to like On1 RAW, which is good but just isn't gelling with me.

So I thought back on what people here had said and took another look at Luminar, which at the time was in beta for windows, but as it currently has no asset management and to open a file you actually have to click open I dismissed it out of hand, then I took one image I really liked and thought what the hell, I'll give it a shot and was pleasantly surprised, even not using masks I got roughly what I has in my head. Now don;t get me wrong, I'd not suggest it yet for Windows primarily because as far as I can tel it only exports and doesn;t have a way to save the editted image to adjust later, which for me is a major nono as my first attempt was good, but not there so I had to start again.

Oh, and another revelation for me were LUT files, I'd heard of them for video but hadn't realised the power of them for photo - what a wonderful thing and quite a deep thing too as I found - from the same supplier - no less than five different flavours of the same file for different cameras (I presume), my favour was the one for RED.

Anyway heres the image and I hope you guys like it and that its looks okay - it looks quite different on my uncalibrated monitor :)


Ethan of the Walking Dead by John Norton, on Flickr
 
Mr Perceptive said:
According to Lee this combo should work, how many slots have you in the adapter?

My Hitech 85mm kit went below 13mm on @mickledore 's 10-24

Anyway this is all irrelevant as none of these kits will work on the forthcoming 8-16mm!!!!
Click to expand...

2 or 3 slots I think. It could be that I didnt have the holder perfectly straight, but I definitely some vignetting when we were in Mull earlier this year.

8-13 will be too wide for what I do.
 
LLcoolDave said:
Hi All
Can anyone recommend a Lee Kit for the 10-24? please- the mrs is asking what i want for xmas! (think im paying though!!)
ive been looking at the kits on WEX, after a polariser to start and just a bit unsure of the kit size?
Click to expand...
Polarisers aren't great on wide angles lenses in my experience. I used one on the Canon 16-35 that I used to have and you end up with a light/dark/light effect across the sky.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
With 2 slots you should be ok, talk to Lee, a couple of their technical sales team use Fuji with the 10-24
Click to expand...
I use the Lee Se7en Five on the 10-24. As stated it does vignette at 13mm or wider, but since my “market “ is A4 it crops out.
 
paulw77 said:
Polarisers aren't great on wide angles lenses in my experience. I used one on the Canon 16-35 that I used to have and you end up with a light/dark/light effect across the sky.
Click to expand...

Even large stop NDs will naturally vignette on wide angles as the light path towards the edges travels through more of the filter as it is at an angle compared with the light path at the centre which is perpendicular to the filter
 
JohnN said:
Hey all - I've not really been posting, in big part because I'm in my near seasonal sell all my kit phase (yes my wife does get to take the p*** each year and I still may well get rid of the XT20 because I have the XT1 too now as well) - this year wasn't helped by really not liking what lightroom does with the files coupled with trying my best to like On1 RAW, which is good but just isn't gelling with me.

So I thought back on what people here had said and took another look at Luminar, which at the time was in beta for windows, but as it currently has no asset management and to open a file you actually have to click open I dismissed it out of hand, then I took one image I really liked and thought what the hell, I'll give it a shot and was pleasantly surprised, even not using masks I got roughly what I has in my head. Now don;t get me wrong, I'd not suggest it yet for Windows primarily because as far as I can tel it only exports and doesn;t have a way to save the editted image to adjust later, which for me is a major nono as my first attempt was good, but not there so I had to start again.

Oh, and another revelation for me were LUT files, I'd heard of them for video but hadn't realised the power of them for photo - what a wonderful thing and quite a deep thing too as I found - from the same supplier - no less than five different flavours of the same file for different cameras (I presume), my favour was the one for RED.

Anyway heres the image and I hope you guys like it and that its looks okay - it looks quite different on my uncalibrated monitor :)


Ethan of the Walking Dead by John Norton, on Flickr
Click to expand...

That’s lovely John. I too have been struggling with the new Fuji sensor and Lightroom. I use a Mac so I have Luminar also. I just get drawn back to LR every time as the workflow is so good.
 
Further to my question the other day about lens choices I have another combination to run past you lot.

I want to try some more telephoto type landscapes,

wondering whether to go 18-55 + 55-250

or

18-135mm for these

Don't think I will need more focal length and 135mm but is the IQ going to be up to it?
 
Thank you.

Aye, that's the problem isn't it, the workflow just makes sense, or it may well be that for me at least, it's what I've come to expect. Still with Luminar it feels familiar and the results with that image came fairly easily.
 
JohnN said:
Hey all - I've not really been posting, in big part because I'm in my near seasonal sell all my kit phase (yes my wife does get to take the p*** each year and I still may well get rid of the XT20 because I have the XT1 too now as well) - this year wasn't helped by really not liking what lightroom does with the files coupled with trying my best to like On1 RAW, which is good but just isn't gelling with me.

So I thought back on what people here had said and took another look at Luminar, which at the time was in beta for windows, but as it currently has no asset management and to open a file you actually have to click open I dismissed it out of hand, then I took one image I really liked and thought what the hell, I'll give it a shot and was pleasantly surprised, even not using masks I got roughly what I has in my head. Now don;t get me wrong, I'd not suggest it yet for Windows primarily because as far as I can tel it only exports and doesn;t have a way to save the editted image to adjust later, which for me is a major nono as my first attempt was good, but not there so I had to start again.

Oh, and another revelation for me were LUT files, I'd heard of them for video but hadn't realised the power of them for photo - what a wonderful thing and quite a deep thing too as I found - from the same supplier - no less than five different flavours of the same file for different cameras (I presume), my favour was the one for RED.

Anyway heres the image and I hope you guys like it and that its looks okay - it looks quite different on my uncalibrated monitor :)


Ethan of the Walking Dead by John Norton, on Flickr
Click to expand...


"this year wasn't helped by really not liking what lightroom does with the files"

What is it that you don't like? I haven't found it that bad thus far
 
Tom Green said:
Further to my question the other day about lens choices I have another combination to run past you lot.

I want to try some more telephoto type landscapes,

wondering whether to go 18-55 + 55-250

or

18-135mm for these

Don't think I will need more focal length and 135mm but is the IQ going to be up to it?
Click to expand...

IMO the 18-135 has brilliant OIS but the IQ is not as good as other Fuji Zooms
 
Tom Green said:
"this year wasn't helped by really not liking what lightroom does with the files"

What is it that you don't like? I haven't found it that bad thus far
Click to expand...
Same old stuff I'm afraid, the can of worms (pun intended), I got back into the habit of pixel peeping and once you know where to look you can't unsee them.

My advice, don't look, you can't see them (usually) in print nor see them at a normal viewing size, but still I know they're there in lightroom, even the latest version.
 
Tom Green said:
Further to my question the other day about lens choices I have another combination to run past you lot.

I want to try some more telephoto type landscapes,

wondering whether to go 18-55 + 55-250

or

18-135mm for these

Don't think I will need more focal length and 135mm but is the IQ going to be up to it?
Click to expand...
Yep, as said above the 18-135 is good lens, the stabilization is very strong, it's not as sharp as a prime, but that's to be expected.

I personally don't see it as being much, if at all worse than the 18-55 but it is heavier.
 
JohnN said:
Same old stuff I'm afraid, the can of worms (pun intended), I got back into the habit of pixel peeping and once you know where to look you can't unsee them.

My advice, don't look, you can't see them (usually) in print nor see them at a normal viewing size, but still I know they're there in lightroom, even the latest version.
Click to expand...

Is that with heavy sharpening and high ISO or just normal in your experience?

I found that if I was light on the sharpening they seemed ok. They don't process as well as my A7 files though.
 
Normal usage sadly, although you have got me wondering if it's worse with softer lenses where I would sharpen.

I tried so many methods but for me moving from lightroom was the only choice in the end, plus I think they're stagnant, resting on their laurels.
 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
Normal usage sadly, although you have got me wondering if it's worse with softer lenses where I would sharpen.

I tried so many methods but for me moving from lightroom was the only choice in the end, plus I think they're stagnant, resting on their laurels.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, although I have being using it with the X-T2 so thats a different sensor, still Fuji thought so still X-Trans

Edit: If its the xt20 then same sensor.
 
Last edited:
Same as the XT20, which up until very recently was my primary camera
 
JohnN said:
Same as the XT20, which up until very recently was my primary camera
Click to expand...

What do you shoot?

I have considered going back to Sony for this reason, but the lens lineup on fuji is sooo good. However I will not move from lightroom. Sounds stupid but I would rather change camera than move from LR.

I wish the xt2 had the normal sensor from the A6500 - then it would be perfect.
 
Tom Green said:
What do you shoot?

I have considered going back to Sony for this reason, but the lens lineup on fuji is sooo good. However I will not move from lightroom. Sounds stupid but I would rather change camera than move from LR.

I wish the xt2 had the normal sensor from the A6500 - then it would be perfect.
Click to expand...
Mostly my kids nowadays, but every now and again travel or landscape snapshots.

Seriously though, if you're not seeing it don't go looking, you'll be happier and the fuji is the nicest camera system I've used and I've used Canon, Nikon and Olympus too.
 
paulw77 said:
Polarisers aren't great on wide angles lenses in my experience. I used one on the Canon 16-35 that I used to have and you end up with a light/dark/light effect across the sky.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I have the Firecrest screw in and it's of little use, particularly as I shoot mostly at the wide end of the 10-24mm.

It'll likely be sold for a 6 stopper or even adapter / reverse grad for sunrise and sunset.
 
Last edited:
ianmarsh said:
One more from docklands:

CW by Ian, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I like the idea but IMO the perspective has been over corrected and it looks like the buildings are falling out from the middle.
 
Nod said:
I like the idea but IMO the perspective has been over corrected and it looks like the buildings are falling out from the middle.
Click to expand...
This is two shots with the 14mm merged and then the merged shot corrected, so I wasn't very hopeful everything would line up but both the big buildings are perfectly vertical even if they don't look it, honest.
 
ianmarsh said:
One more from docklands:

CW by Ian, on Flickr
Click to expand...


"Cracking" Architectual Fujigraph Sir, well composed, uprights are upright, some nice reflections, and excellent mono PP work with a full range of good punchy tones.(y)

George.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top